Detectability of Fibrils by Dilation Technique in Digital Mammography
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11113/mjfas.v17n4.2134Keywords:
Digital Mammography, Receiver Operating Characteristic Analysis, Dilation Technique, Fibrils PerformanceAbstract
The detectability of fibrils in mammographic phantom images by morphological enhancement was analysed in the present study. Materials that mimic fibrils were imaged by a digital mammography machine at 28 and 29 kVP. The images were processed by a dilation technique to produce second set of images. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to compare the detection performance from the two sets of images. As compared to original images, the 28 kVP’s fibrils images from dilation technique become more prominence to be detected by observers. While at 29 kVP only a few observers can found the fibrils images from dilation technique. This study suggests morphological enhancement of mammography image did not increase the detection of low frequency signals of the images.References
S. Buseman, J. Mouchawar, N. Calonge, and T. Byers, “Mammography screening matters for young women with breast carcinoma: Evidence of downstaging among 42-49-year-old women with a history of previous mammography screening,” Cancer, vol. 97, no. 2, pp. 352–358, 2003.
E.A. Sickles, “Breast cancer screening outcomes in women ages 40-49: clinical experience with service screening using modern mammography,” J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr, no. 22, pp. 99–104, 1997.
E.D. Pisano, R.E. Hendrick, M.J. Yaffe, et al., “Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital versus Film Mammography: Exploratory Analysis of Selected Population Subgroups in DMIST,” Radiology, vol. 246, no. 2, pp. 376–383, 2008.
S. Ahn, M. Wooster, C. Valente, et al., “Impact of Screening Mammography on Treatment in Women Diagnosed with Breast Cancer,” Annals of Surgical Oncology, vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 1–8, 2018.
G.L.C. Chye and H. Yahaya, “Second Report of the National Cancer Registry. Cancer Incidence in Malaysia 2003,” National Cancer Registry, pp. 1–141, 2004.
N.A. Taib, C.H. Yip, M. Ibrahim, C.J. Ng, and H. Farizah, “Breast Cancer in Malaysia: Are Our Women Getting The Right Message? 10 Year-Experience in A Single Institution In Malaysia,” Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 141–145, 2007.
A.D.A. Maidment, “Digital mammography,” Seminars in Roentgenology, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 216–230, 2003.
H. Moradmand, S. Setayeshi, A.R. Karimian, M. Sirous, and M.E. Akbari, “Comparing the performance of image enhancement methods to detect microcalcification clusters in digital mammography,” Iranian Journal of Cancer Prevention, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 61–68, 2012.
J.R.C. Lameijer, A.M.P. Coolen, A.C. Voogd, et al., “Correction to: Frequency and characteristics of contralateral breast abnormalities following recall at screening mammography,” European Radiology, vol. 28, pp. 4205–4214, 2018.
A.P. Dhawan, G. Buelloni, and R. Gordon, “Enhancement of Mammographic Features by Optimal Adaptive Neighborhood,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, vol. MI, no. 1, pp. 8–15, 1986.
T. Stojic and B. Reljin, “Enhancement of Microcalcifications in Digitized Mammograms: Multifractal and Mathematical Morphology Approach,” FME Transactions, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 1–9, 2010.
T. Stojić, I. Reljin, and B. Reljin, “Local Contrast Enhancement in Digital Mammography by using Mathematical Morphology,” ISSCS 2005: International Symposium on Signals, Circuits and Systems - Proceedings, vol. 2, pp. 609–612, 2005.
Y. Kimori, “Mathematical morphology-based approach to the enhancement of morphological features in medical images,” Journal of Clinical Bioinformatics, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 33, 2011.
A. Kayode, B. Afolabi, and B. Ibitoye, “An Explorative Survey of Image Enhancement Techniques Used in Mammography,” International Journal of Computer Science Issues (IJCSI), vol. 12, no. 1, p. 72, 2015.
C.E. Metz, “ROC methodology in radiologic imaging.,” Investigative radiology, vol. 21, no. 9, pp. 720–33, 1986.
N.A. Obuchowski, “Fundamentals of clinical research for radiologists - ROC analysis,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 184, pp. 364–372, 2005.
L.E. Bantis and Z. Feng, “Comparison of two correlated ROC curves at a given specificity or sensitivity level,” Statistics in Medicine, vol. 35, no. 24, pp. 4352–4367, 2016.
X. Zhai, D.P. Chakraborty, and X. Zhai, “A bivariate contaminated binormal model for robust fitting of proper ROC curves to a pair of correlated, possibly degenerate, ROC datasets,” Medical Physics, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 2207–2222, 2017.
C.E. Metz, “ROC analysis in medical imaging: a tutorial review of the literature.,” Radiological physics and technology, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 2–12, 2008.
R. Kumar and M. Informatics, “Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve for Medical Researchers,” Indian Pediatrics, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 277–87, 2011.
W.M. Saridan, “Measurement of Modulation Transfer Function and Wiener Spectrum of Diagnostic X-Ray Screen-Film Systems in a Hospital Setting,” (1995).
R.C. Gonzalez, R.E. Woods, and S.L. Eddins, “Digital Image Processing Using Matlab,” http://www.lavoisier.fr/notice/frKWOOKASAO3WS6O.html.
O. Marques, Practical Image and Video Processing Using MATLAB. IEEE Press, A John Wiley & Sons, Inc. International, 2011.
J.M. Pickard, “Using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curves to Evaluate Digital Mammography,” pp. 1–6, 2004.
N.A. Obuchowski, “Receiver operating characteristic curves and their use in radiology.,” Radiology, vol. 229, no. 1, pp. 3–8, 2003.
C.E. Metz, “Basic principles of ROC analysis.,” Seminars in nuclear medicine, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 283–98, 1978.
S.H. Park, J.M. Goo, and C.-H. Jo, “Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve: Practical Review for Radiologists,” Korean Journal of Radiology, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 11–8, 2004.
M. Veta, P.J. van Diest, S.M. Willems, et al., “Assessment of algorithms for mitosis detection in breast cancer histopathology images,” Medical Image Analysis, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 237–248, 2015.
J. V. Carter, J. Pan, S.N. Rai, and S. Galandiuk, “ROC-ing along: Evaluation and interpretation of receiver operating characteristic curves,” Surgery (United States), vol. 159, no. 6, pp. 1638–45, 2016.
J.A. Hanley and B.J. McNeil, “The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve,” Radiology, vol. 143, no. 1, pp. 29–36, 1982.
